Posted by Raul on April 9, 2013
Stopping the brain from working; how can anyone do that?
Since being a child the problem has been the same. Now, as an adult, the problem persists: A brain that doesn’t stop working with thoughts. Always there is something in my mind moving, re-shaping…morphing into a new form.
Don’t get me wrong; I’m not saying those thought have always a value; in fact, most of the times they are just runaway thoughts that mean nothing and go nowhere. But they are there; always using brain space and energy!
It just seems so incredible for me when I see someone looking at the infinite, and when asking what is in his/her mind, the answer is: “Nothing” And after some questions about the moment of looking at the infinite, the answers really note that the person has a blank mind with no thoughts at all.
After so many years and so many times asking to different people, I can see that clearly there is a time and moment when most people can enter a sort of trance state and simply stop thoughts completely, and most of the times without even trying to reach that point. Just by getting lost in an image through a window or a wall in front, most people seem to have the capability to stop the brain from working and simply allow the time go by in a completely motionless moment of mental and physical inactivity.
Now, when I say no brain activity I mean human thoughts, or at least images going through. Obviously the brain never stops working since it has so much to do with keeping up automated breathing and heart pit, and so many other bodily functions required to just stay alive. If there was absolutely no brain activity at all then the body would be dead!
It is really intriguing for me since, as I mentioned above, I’ve never been able to do that, and even though many times the thoughts are just random images that re-shape continually without direction or purpose, still they are there all the time.
The point is, there is always a thought going on, and never a moment of rest for the brain from moving. It can be a question about something that has to be done and I don’t know how; it can be about decisions that have to be made and there is the need to collect more information before such decision can be taken properly; it can be something like the curiosity of what happens in a specific situation when a specific action occurs; it can be a jumping memory of a bad moment the day before, etc.
Honestly, sometimes I feel a sort of envy of those people who can simply stop their brain from working for a while and let the time go by while being in a sort of stand by mode. It seems to be so refreshing as a moment of rest for the brain and the mind!
Do you have those moments of getting lost without thoughts while looking at a wall or a window? If so, tell me how it is and how does it feel.
Posted by Raul on March 26, 2013
Let’s take a group of men and women from different nationalities, different languages and different religions.
Let’s put them in a remote place where there’s no civilization close by.
Let’s leave them there with no equipment, no tools, no supplies, and even no clothing.
What do we have?
They all look the same; have the same type of body with just a slight difference in skin and eyes color, and maybe some difference in eye shapes.
There are no main differences.
They will need food and shelter to survive, so they will have to hunt and either build something or find a natural shelter like a cave.
They cannot talk to each other using a language since they speak different ones and don’t know the languages the others speak, so they have to rely on gestures and imitation of natural sounds.
Let’s assume one of them sees a deer going by and realizes the possibility of getting food and some protection from the elements with the skin of the animal.
He would probably start signaling the others about the deer, so they can go hunting. They will realize the presence of the animal and see the possibilities.
Most probably they will use hand signals to direct each other to surround the deer and attack it with rocks and sticks.
If they do not succeed at first (which is the most probably outcome) they will organize better for the next opportunity.
After a while and with a better knowledge of each one’s performance in those situation, using hand signals they probably will select a leader to follow, creating a form of organization.
My point is that, without the technology and civilization we have today, we are no different from cavemen, and even more important, without our civilization, we are no different from each other. Races do not matter until we create differences by language, religion and customs.
All this is very nice to think that we are equal and should behave as brothers and sisters, but there is also the other side of the coin.
While we might be the same and no different from cavemen, what would happen if we bring, let’s say, Cro-Magnon men to this civilization?
If we teach them the language and several skills like driving, shopping, dancing, etc, so they can interact in our environment, being cavemen who are bound by the opportunity of hunting and stuffing themselves when a good piece is catch, mostly because of knowing it may be many days before the next one is available for feeding, wouldn’t they eat all they can, drive with madness sometimes with a sense of opportunism? Even vote for a candidate that promise what’s more important for them rather than the whole?
My point is; do we have a civilization? Or just lots of technology and creature comforts that, although it gives us a different kind of life that the one our ancestors had, does nothing to change us from the origins?
Just another crazy thought!
Posted by Raul on March 12, 2013
If history is bound to repeat itself, why study history? We can learn about the past by just watching the present! (Just kidding!).
It happened before and it’ll happen again. The names change, the locations change, the political structure change; yet the same happen all over again.
It is not the political system…they all fall sooner or later. It is not the economy…they all started from different situations and ended up at the same place. It is not the geography, climate conditions or race…the results are, again, the same.
The problem seems to be the natural instinct of following the shortest and easiest path.
When situations are complicated, there are fights and self pressure to achieve; take for instance what’s happening in the Middle East and North Africa right now. The expression of opinion and the pressure for change can be done with violence at the risk of personal life.
When the situation becomes easier, the instinct of following the easiest path becomes the norm and the brain rests. Compare the previous example of protesters with the ones here requesting the end of war; holding signs, walking…then lunch.
In both cases the documents for the end of the cycle are signed off.
Consider the differences between Capitalism and Communism.
-An extremely brief and very loose description
In Capitalism there are no limits to go up, and all will depend (theoretically) on each individual’s effort; but after just a little bit comes the realization of the problem with those without the required characteristics to succeed, who need the help of the system to survive. Then the need to implement an egalitarian system which will provide to those in need, becoming the dead weight of society, and the opposite of the system itself.
In Communism the equalization is the norm, so the same opportunity for everyone to achieve what is the most desirable activity as a profession, without the problematic of different incomes. Then people dream of wealth and the possibility of establishing differences between themselves by the differences in material possessions.
Both, in the essence are good systems; both are manipulated by people who seek their own wealth; and both are sabotaged by the people who, after just a little while, want the opposite of what the system stands for.
What seems to be the common point? Acting by instincts, rather than by decisions made based on observation and thoughts that are supported by logic and education: The creature moves by its instincts rather than its brain capabilities.
So we are back to square one!
Everything starts in the direction that seems to be the appropriate one, just to be turned around after a while in the search of the “other” possibilities that aren’t “naturally” contained in the original direction and intentions.
If it starts, it’ll end. Cycles!
“An empire might be built on logic and reason, but it’s run on passion and faith” (Sorry, I don’t remember who said that)
“The permanence of a system will depend on decisions made out of logic and reason rather than passionate feelings” (I said that)
Yet every time the systems are run in the same way a person is run: by the provision to instincts, rather than using the instincts as a “fail-safe” integrated system of the machine (for its self-protection) that supports the thinking entity, it’ll be inevitable to go back to square one, as an instinct to remain at the same safe level.
So what goes up must come down. An instinct controlled society will remain cycling at the same level since the objective of the instinct is to remain in a stable level. Only when society becomes controlled by logic and education will the system stop cycling back to become a unidirectional growing society.
Just my personal opinion.
What is your take on this? Do you think we live in cycles? Are they generated by the perpetual use of instincts rather than logic?
Posted by Raul on February 22, 2013
Let’s try a crazy possibility for a moment. Let’s assume it is true to see what happen.
We can talk, we can scream, we can sing and we can do so many things to express ourselves to the surroundings, but we do tend to disregard our own irradiation.
Just like a wire in which we circulate an electric current will create a magnetic field around that we can measure, the same way we, being electric creatures, generate a field around us at all times while we are alive.
Our thoughts are electric currents traveling throughout our brain. The signal received by the brain to recognize pain when we hit our hand against the wall is an electric current. The signals sent by the brain to the muscles in our body to move an arm, walk, etc. are electric currents, and so on.
As long as those electric currents are running through our body, back and forth to our brain, we are alive. When we die, there are no more electric currents in the body. It becomes, well…a dead body! (Duh!)
So we generate a field around us that we cannot see or measure at this time, yet it does exist, and maybe that’s what some people claim to be able to see as the Aura…the shinning around a human being that reflects what’s in that person’s heart (feelings, intentions, etc.)
We can “perceive” that field, that irradiation from another person, and when that irradiation somehow synchronizes with ours we can feel a sort of “connection”, and at the other hand, when that irradiation differs from ours then we can feel a sort of “rejection”.
Now, since our thoughts, feelings and intentions are electric currents in our brains, and those thoughts, feelings and intentions alter our physical state (if we are mad our muscles tend to tense, and if we are happy our muscles tend to relax), then it’ll be logic that the irradiation we emit should vary according to the state of our thoughts, feelings and intentions, most probably creating a sort of different wavelength in the spectrum of our iradiation. The thoughts, feelings and intentions in our brain are the generators of the irradiation and our whole body becomes a sort of “amplifier” of that irradiation, which is continually modified according to the state of our mind.
So, if we have this irradiation at all times, and if this irradiation varies depending on what’s in our thoughts, feelings and intentions, then this irradiation should have a sort of “interaction” with the irradiation of another person when close to each other, just like the magnetic field of a wire influences the magnetic field of another wire when they are close to each other.
Seen from that perspective, and making comparisons with the interaction of the magnetic field projected by wires which have circulation of electric currents, we could then analyze the results of human interaction using analogies.
When two wires are set in the same position while having the same electric current, thus the same magnetic field, those magnetic fields add up to a higher intensity. If we go to an extreme and position the same way thousands of wires with the same current, we create a powerful magnetic field that can be used in an electric motor – Two people in the same mood and feelings tend to feed each other in the same direction. If we get together thousands of people in the same mood and feelings we can create a revolution! (Think of a charismatic leader).
When two wires are set in the opposite position while having the same electric current, thus the same magnetic field, those magnetic fields repel each other. If we have thousands of those wires set in different positions with the same electric current, we have a chaotic magnetic field. – Two people in the opposite mood and feelings tend to reject each other. Thousands of people in different moods and feelings create a grayish society of distrust. (Think of big cities with millions of inhabitants).
But going back to the basic concept, have you felt distrust for no reason when you first meet someone? Like when going to an office to get a signed document and even before talking to the person in charge, just by getting close to her desk you know you are not going to get anything with this person.
Or maybe feeling the opposite; trust without a logic reason when getting close to someone that you might have never seen before? Like for no reason feeling friendliness from someone standing at the bus stop; or the grocery store cashier that starts a conversation that you feel somehow happy to follow, even if you weren’t in the mood of talking before.
Maybe “love” in part is a sort of synchronization of the irradiating fields between two people, creating an attraction that cannot be explained, and sometimes even defy logic (obviously logic in this case is reasoning based in a society in the material world and its requirements – “He is not of your same background, how can you fall in love with him?”)
My favorite: When you call someone on the phone; you hear the ringing and wait for the person to answer, and when he/she does and just say “Hello”, sometimes you immediately know if that person is mad, happy, sleepy, etc. There’s no visual you can use to reach that idea and the sound of the voice is distorted by the electronic transformation of the sound into electric pulses and back to sound; so how can you know the mood the person is in? Has it happened to you? Maybe we can perceive the other’s person’s irradiation at distances.
Have you had a sudden feeling that something might have happened to a loved one, just to receive a phone call a couple of minutes later to inform you of a tragic event to that person? Or even just suddenly having a thought about that person for no reason, and then receiving the phone call to say hello, then learning in the conversation that the person just decided a moment ago: “I’m gonna call her!”?
Experts insist a crying baby gets calmed when hugged by his mother because he can hear her heart…something he knows very well after nine months. But why then there’s people who seems to have a “natural” ability to “connect” with babies? (I mention babies because they cannot talk and don’t have knowledge of how to communicate).
Seems to me we do have another way of communication and a way to “broadcast” ourselves by the irradiation of our personality (which is created by our thoughts, feelings and intentions). And logically we should be able to control our irradiation by controlling what we think, feel and do in our lives. In many doctrines a monk suppose to have a very shiny aura since his life is dedicated to service and compassion to others and harmony with nature.
I’m not an expert in the field, so cannot say this is the way it is, but after so many years roaming this planet observing people and their interactions, looks like a possibility. I do know that while at work usually I’m quiet and thinking this kind of weird thoughts, while other people around is thinking and talking about the latest music video or the party they are going next…I’m not a person they like to spend time with, even if I always smile and try to be kind to them. We definitely irradiate in different wavelengths!
What do you think? Do you believe we irradiate ourselves?
Posted by Raul on February 19, 2013
Matter exists in the universe, and the interaction within itself creates energy. Energy then influences matter creating more interaction within matter, which in turn generates more energy: A self feeding system.
As energy keeps re-shaping matter, at some point the collapse of all matter within itself will occur, reaching the state of highest energy possible due to the concentration of matter in one point after all black holes become combined. Then the extremely high energy will “explode” the matter with a shiny light at the Big Bang point creating a new universe, and the cycle begins once more: A new creation.
While matter spreads to later stop and revert to a single point in this process, energy first goes to its weakest point when matter stops spreading, and from then it has a continuous growth to its maximum expression at the moment of total matter concentration.
It could be then that energy influences matter in the process of creation, not only at the new beginning, but also throughout the whole process of dispersion and later concentration, with its continual individual re-shaping and re-creations within. So we could say energy is the creator of everything: “And there was light, and everything was created in an instant out of the infinite emptiness”.
Energy shouldn’t have thoughts, thus not consciousness and/or intelligence, but from a very simplistic point of view, since being the one who creates, it’ll be easy to assign it the roll of an intelligent creator.
Now, being us physical creatures made out of matter, we do have energy within to power us, and which abandon us at the moment of death to dissipates into the air (which is also space), becoming part of the energy existent in the universe, while our bodies (matter) transform into the general matter around (rotten and dissolved coffin and body).
From that point, it’ll be easy to consider that our bodies are part of the physical universe while our consciousness, entity or soul (energy) is part of a higher plane in the universe and also a part of the creator itself: “The return to the creator to be embraced by him”.
If this matter-energy interaction is true, how would you explain that to a very ignorant person ten to twenty thousand years ago, if just a couple of hundred years ago people still believed that lightning was the fury of God? Wouldn’t be necessary to use known elements of ordinary life like images of an old person (as a symbol of wise), people, clouds, fire, wings, cute babies, etc to explain in a form of an understandable tale?
With the unlikable idea of completely ending one’s consciousness at the moment of death, with nothing to remain of it, and the still unexplained images of ghosts, death and back to life experiences, out of the body experiences, etc. together with the unknowns of the capabilities of the human brain, wouldn’t it be really easy to consider that “there must be something else”?
So what if the reason for those unexplained elements is that the unconscious part of our brain remains after death? Then the energy that dissipates could have a sort of intelligence and/or memory, which would promote the idea of entity (soul for believers, but that would imply consciousness instead of unconsciousness), and the energy in the universe could also be consider an unconscious entity with some sort of intelligence, although not necessarily conscious thoughts and decision making. From that point of view, we could consider ourselves part of a greater unconsciousness that connects us in a way still difficult to understand, but that would make us “Individual Units” interconnected by a common origin and a common wealth of knowledge that we could access through our own unconscious, like a remote computer connecting to a central database. Could be that what Carl Jung was talking about in his work “Man and His Symbols”?
This “if” proposal would make feasible the concept of an intelligent creator (the universal energy) and the possibility of us being part of it (bits of that energy coming to “power” a physical body), that will return to the creator or origin, carrying with us the acquired knowledge (in the form of unconscious memories) in a physical life, to contribute to the universal knowledge of the mother (or father) entity, that will in turn help create higher creatures in the physical life in order to acquire higher and higher knowledge: A self feeding system again.
Under this proposal we would be physical creatures that have no conscious knowledge and no connection between one another (individual units); traveling life in loneliness in search for connection (love, friendship) and knowledge that would help us understand our origins and reason of being. Yet somehow “deep inside” (due to our unconscious) we know we pertain to a common origin, to one another, and we know answers to questions that come to light from “inspiration” and/or “revelations” that surface when, without purposeful training, we are able to connect with our unconscious, and through it, to the universal unconsciousness we belong to.
If this is true, then the purpose of our life is simply to acquire knowledge and experiences and shape them in a personal way by use of our feelings, to bring this information back to the universal unconsciousness for its continuous growth. It would be not just the knowledge we can acquire, but perhaps more importantly, the way such knowledge is interpreted and perceived under the influence of our personal feelings and sensations while experiencing life. That way the same knowledge for different persons, like the experience of marriage or parenthood, will have different variations, contributing to a wider wealth of knowledge and feelings to the mother (or father) entity
In a more “profane” way of thinking, we come from the knowledge of a universal Wikipedia or Google, and after death, what we learned in life, becomes our contribution “pages” or “entries” to augment the source of knowledge. We could be “Observers” sent in a lifetime mission. How many times it has been said that life is a school?
I’m not saying this is the way things are, I’m just trying to connect dots on my own, without simply accepting what is already “proposed and certified until revision”. And obviously I’m going into very general explanations because more detail would imply a whole book on its own!
What is your take in this? Do you think the above “If” proposal could be true?